Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => The Coffee Corner => Topic started by: Justan on November 07, 2009, 01:39:39 pm
-
Foreword: The science of analyzing how perception works is catching up with L dV
(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/00648/news-graphics-2007-_648799a.jpg)
By Richard Alleyne, Science Correspondent
Published: 1:41PM GMT 28 Oct 2009
The secret behind Mona Lisa's enigmatic smile has been explained by scientists who believe it changes depending on which part of the eye sees it first.
One of the charms of the world's most famous painting is that she appears radiant one moment and then serious and sardonic the next.
Now scientists claim to have come up with an answer to her changing moods - our eyes are sending mixed signals to the brain.
They believe Mona Lisa's smile depends on what cells in the retina pick up the image and what channel the image is transmitted through in the brain.
Sometimes one channel wins over the other, and you see the smile, sometimes others take over and you do not see the smile.
Different cells in the eye are designed to pick up different colours, contrasts, backgrounds and foregrounds. Some deal with central vision while others with peripheral.
Depending on what cells picks up the image first depends on what channel they are sent to the brian for interpreting.
These channels encode data about an object's size, clarity, brightness and location in the visual field.
"Sometimes one channel wins over the other, and you see the smile, sometimes others take over and you don't see the smile," said Dr Luis Martinez Otero, a neuroscientist at Institute of Neuroscience in Alicante, Spain, who conducted the study, told New Scientist.
To get a fuller picture of the reasons behind Mona Lisa's vanishing smile, Dr Martinez Otero varied different aspects of the Mona Lisa that are processed by different visual channels, and then asked volunteers whether they saw a smile or not.
The rest is here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science...atic-smile.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/6453526/The-secret-behind-Mona-Lisas-enigmatic-smile.html)
-
I think it has something to do with the seat of the pants.
Rob C
-
I think she's just trying really hard not to laugh at that guy. However there's some good rap there for my artist's statement. "Visual channels" is so totally hot.
Smiling only takes you so far. Mona like you always wanted to see her...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/12/n...t_n_214964.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/12/nude-mona-lisa-like-paint_n_214964.html)
-
I thought that work was attributed to Leo's assistant Gian Giacomo Caprotti da Oreno aka Salai or Il Salaino or "The Little Unclean One"
-
I thought that work was attributed to Leo's assistant Gian Giacomo Caprotti da Oreno aka Salai or Il Salaino or "The Little Unclean One"
There ya go with the yeast again!
A pedantic reliance on mere scholarly research and hard facts is so often counterproductive to the higher goals of Art History. OK it's the worst piece of anatomically challenged schlock ever to come down to us from the Renaissance. But that doesn't PROVE Leonardo didn't do it. It would be so cool if he did, why is that so hard to understand?
And let's not say too much about that Salai guy, especially in Maine. BTW Salai and the nekkid Mona both have very similar faces. Which lends support to the "Mona = Leonardo-in-drag" theory, which Salai presumably knew about and parroted.
-
> There ya go with the yeast again!
Did not! I didn’t mention studies of meat even one time. Oh, wait! Maybe I did?!?
> A pedantic reliance on mere scholarly research and hard facts is so often counterproductive to the higher goals of Art History.
That was funny!
> But that doesn't PROVE Leonardo didn't do it. It would be so cool if he did, why is that so hard to understand?
I don’t have any problem with that. LdV did a lot of anatomical studies. But he’d be more likely to uh, do boys. It would probably be pretty easy to lift finger prints off this work. Perhaps there’s a little DNA captured in the paint, like a fly in amber...
> And let's not say too much about that Salai guy, especially in Maine. BTW Salai and the nekkid Mona both have very similar faces. Which lends support to the "Mona = Leonardo-in-drag" theory, which Salai presumably knew about and parroted.
But Mona was from the Gherardini family. Her panting is probably the highest expression of mannerism because of it’s subtlety. The unclean one spent most of his life in Leo’s uh, studio…
-
Her panting is probably the highest expression of mannerism because of it’s subtlety.
Not sure how I'd feel about a chubby Italian woman panting at my place.
-
Not sure how I'd feel about a chubby Italian woman panting at my place.
But it's very subtle panting, and I think Justan said she's well mannered. I'd decide on a case by case basis.
-
…and as another ship sales into the abyss let us all pause and wonder: Do we want yeast in our paint or some old chubby Italian lady whom we can’t decide if she’s pissed or smiling.
Maybe both…and maybe neither….
-
Depending on what cells picks up the image first depends on what channel they are sent to the brian for interpreting.
I guess this brian guy is pretty good at doing this...
or did you mean - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain) ?
-
I guess this brian guy is pretty good at doing this...
or did you mean - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain) ?
Intersting quotation from the above link:
"However, sophisticated control of behavior on the basis of complex sensory input requires the information-integrating capabilities of a centralized brain."
I now inderstand why some people get beer-bellies: it depends where their brains are located.
At just under 70 kilos I have to assume I simply don't have one.
;-(
Rob C
-
...brain... At just under 70 kilos I have to assume I simply don't have one.
Count yourself among the fortunate. Those brain things just fill you up with words which when vented in public cause embarrassment.
-
I guess this brian guy is pretty good at doing this...
or did you mean - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain) ?
You'd have to get back to Richard Alleyne or his copy editor for that one. Perhaps he was caught up in a moment of projecting or just sleeping at the wheel?
-
Intersting quotation from the above link:
"However, sophisticated control of behavior on the basis of complex sensory input requires the information-integrating capabilities of a centralized brain."
I now inderstand why some people get beer-bellies: it depends where their brains are located.
At just under 70 kilos I have to assume I simply don't have one.
;-(
Rob C
Just a fancy way of saying go by the seat of your knickers
-
You'd have to get back to Richard Alleyne or his copy editor for that one. Perhaps he was caught up in a moment of projecting or just sleeping at the wheel?
Maybe some old chubby, smiling, pissed Italian lady was there panting with her friend Brian at the time.
-
Why are Italian ladies of a certain style suddenly getting a bad press? As in printing, I mean, though you can never tell what the rest of mankind might be up to.
Rob C
-
Maybe some old chubby, smiling, pissed Italian lady was there panting with her friend Brian at the time.
Now that's the spirit!
-
Why are Italian ladies of a certain style suddenly getting a bad press? As in printing, I mean, though you can never tell what the rest of mankind might be up to.
Rob C
Suddenly?
-
All you Italian woman bashers need to bite your tongues.
How 'bout THIS Italian woman?
(http://chuchscoop.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/sophia_loren.jpg)
-
All you Italian woman bashers need to bite your tongues.
How 'bout THIS Italian woman?
(http://chuchscoop.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/sophia_loren.jpg)
So how do you get to marry a Neapolitan millionairess?
Rob C
-
Come to think of it, I would prefer Monica Bellucci; in fact, there's a shot of her in a Pirelli where she has an expression not a zillion miles removed from La Gioconda's in her famous public outing.
Now Gina...
Rob C
-
So how do you get to marry a Neapolitan millionairess?
That's easy. You become a billionaire movie producer and you make her famous.
-
Oh, ah. Gina and Sophia. Did I not fall to the dust at their feet weeping tears of love and desire.
-
Then I saw "Et Dieu... créa la femme". That was the end.
-
Oh, ah. Gina and Sophia. Did I not fall to the dust at their feet weeping tears of love and desire.
Federico himself could not have said it better.
-
Then I saw "Et Dieu... créa la femme". That was the end.
Now you are getting into dangerous territory; just leave Bri Bri alone - she's mine!
Rob C
-
Federico himself could not have said it better.
Maybe, but Carlo held the winning hand!
Rob C
-
All you Italian woman bashers need to bite your tongues.
How 'bout THIS Italian woman?
(http://chuchscoop.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/sophia_loren.jpg)
"Everything you see, I owe to spaghetti."
(Pavlov-like comment here)
-
Well, a change from Photoshop.
Rob C
-
Well, a change from Photoshop.
Yes, that was well before Filter->Liquify. Any further liquification would clearly be futile for this gal. Of course you have to wonder how long she had to hold her breath, Photoshop is so much kinder in that regard.
Also pre J-lo. Sorry Sophia, no comparison whatsoever.
Edit...OK some monkey is bound to do this, so it might as well be me.
-
It's like a bad haircut, Bill. Now her hands look to big to me. Perhaps, if we want to make Sophia look like this year's model, we need to bring in the big guns, like the guy who pulled this one off:
http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com/200...ut-on-limb.html (http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com/2009/11/armani-exchange-going-out-on-limb.html)
-
It's like a bad haircut, Bill.
OK, I admit it, much was lost. The sheer Earth Mother Goddess inertia of the original was not to be trifled with.
I wanna be as good as the guy who did this for a Ralph Lauren ad campaign. In Oz only, they're skinnier down there. The flying saucer was cropped out.
(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2009/10/19/magazine/20moral.190.jpg)
http://ethicist.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/...apan&st=cse (http://ethicist.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/20/should-photos-come-with-warning-labels/?scp=1&sq=photoshop%20japan&st=cse)
-
Who, exactly, do these people think they are impressing? Making women look like freaks is hardly likely to make the normal buying public swoon with pleasure and the desire to emulate, never mind part with money! There are ever the exceptions, but in numbers to sustain an industry?
I believe the fashion industry is committing suicide.
Rob C
-
I'm guessing the person who did the work was trying to hint at someone with the unobtainable. It appears a case of art imitating art instead of imitating nature.
Elongating some body features and truncating others while giving a cold, appraising, even aloof stare as does the model, first sauntered to fame a little while after Leo's work at the top of this thread. With Mona, there is a question of her mood. Not so much with the model above. The question above, i suppose about appealing to jealousy. The model is what the viewer can never be. But the viewer can get the pants, at least.
But in it's way it is captivating. Showing that playing to the perceptions of the viewer makes for compelling work
Unrelated: Does anyone know what Sofia’s favorite kind of spaghetti is?
-
[attachment=17880:ralphblo...again_v2.jpg]
OK, I admit it, much was lost. The sheer Earth Mother Goddess inertia of the original was not to be trifled with.
I've never been one to resist a little trifling myself. Tried to interject a little "Earth Mother Goddess inertia", then a few sandwiches. I'm not sure that the outfit is right for the shape of her face, though. Perhaps some things are best left alone. Relating back to the beginning of this thread, does she seem to have a more defined smile to you in this context? I didn't mess with it.
-
[attachment=17880:ralphblo...again_v2.jpg]
I've never been one to resist a little trifling myself. Tried to interject a little "Earth Mother Goddess inertia", then a few sandwiches. I'm not sure that the outfit is right for the shape of her face, though. Perhaps some things are best left alone. Relating back to the beginning of this thread, does she seem to have a more defined smile to you in this context? I didn't mess with it.
A good example of the spaghetti eater vs. the spaghetti itself?
-
1. "I'm guessing the person who did the work was trying to hint at someone with the unobtainable. It appears a case of art imitating art instead of imitating nature. "
But since the model has been turned into a freak, who would want to obtain the same figure?
2. "The model is what the viewer can never be. But the viewer can get the pants, at least."
Isn't the viewer fortunate!
3. "Unrelated: Does anyone know what Sofia’s favorite kind of spaghetti is?"
Probably Italian?
Rob C
EDIT: why does the final line about point 3 above (Probably Italian?) appear outwith the box? It wasn't meant to, and in the preview it does not.
-
> I've never been one to resist a little trifling myself. Tried to interject a little "Earth Mother Goddess inertia", then a few sandwiches. I'm not sure that the outfit is right for the shape of her face, though. Perhaps some things are best left alone.
That was good!
Did you do anything with the tone of Mo’s face? The match of skin tones is remarkable.
> Relating back to the beginning of this thread, does she seem to have a more defined smile to you in this context? I didn't mess with it.
A little bit. By changing context, her eyes appear more inviting (smiling eyes) while the lips give the appearance that she’s both annoyed and amused at what she’s seeing – presumably the viewer. I hadn’t thought of it before but these two features make for an interesting juxtaposition of expressions. Typically one smiles but the smile doesn’t reach the eyes. This is the other way around.
It also makes her a lot more alluring than the original.
-
me > 1. "I'm guessing the person who did the work was trying to hint at someone with the unobtainable. It appears a case of art imitating art instead of imitating nature. "
Rob> But since the model has been turned into a freak, who would want to obtain the same figure?
The image isn’t intended for you or me. It is likely intended for those who desire to be (or perhaps are) thin beyond reality. The photographer (or photo chopper) is in pursuit of a characature that emphasizes style over content. It’s perfect for those who are shopping for clothing. You can see the concept repeated with almost every mannequin made. It is a theme so broadly used that I bet many young people accept as normal.
Also it’s interesting in that by putting Mo’s face on it, the body language is clearly very open and relaxed while the model’s (not Mo’s) face remains aloof.
-
me > 1. "I'm guessing the person who did the work was trying to hint at someone with the unobtainable. It appears a case of art imitating art instead of imitating nature. "
Rob> But since the model has been turned into a freak, who would want to obtain the same figure?
The image isn’t intended for you or me. It is likely intended for those who desire to be (or perhaps are) thin beyond reality. The photographer (or photo chopper) is in pursuit of a characature that emphasizes style over content. It’s perfect for those who are shopping for clothing. You can see the concept repeated with almost every mannequin made. It is a theme so broadly used that I bet many young people accept as normal.
Also it’s interesting in that by putting Mo’s face on it, the body language is clearly very open and relaxed while the model’s (not Mo’s) face remains aloof.
I was a fashion photographer for many years, so I do understand some of the problems and a little about target markets too; but this is different - it is anatomically incorrect, not a "thinness" problem at all. Think childbearing hips...
Rob C
-
> I was a fashion photographer for many years, so I do understand some of the problems and a little about target markets too;
I saw one of your photos in a thread. It was very nice.
> but this is different - it is anatomically incorrect, not a "thinness" problem at all. Think childbearing hips...
Agreed. I commented above that shortly after Leo finished Mo’s portrait, there was period in art where elongating some body features and truncating others was considered high art. As was done in the photo, the artists during this period (often called high renaissance or mannerism), the artists made caricatures of their models. During this period, many works (painting and sculpture) were done to elegantly emphasize key body features and create strong emotions on the part of viewers as a result. As a digression, a lot of Renaissance art was about anatomical accuracy in minute detail. It was a huge thing at the time. Following that was a trend towards mixing anatomical accuracy with select variations.
Here the goals are probably similar. For younger people, I bet they are so inundated with the cult of thinness that most accept the image. For older folk, it is probably less appealing.
Perhaps had the photographer shown Colorwave’s imagination and put Mo’s face on the model he would have improved the image. She’s hotter than the model he used and i bet most wouldn’t have recognized her as Mo...